Valve is not where they are because they bought games from other company, and yes they are in the market since 1998 so of course they are in a better position than any other store.īut Valve is also very open source (just look at what they've done in the VR space) and bring constent evolution to their launcher, without forgetting about the consumer. But Epic? They are the worst part of PC gaming. See, I don't care for a new launcher, and competition IS good. Well, maybe a new Bulletstorm? Ah nah, not happening because Fortnite has to get a new season. So maybe a new Jazz Jackrabbit? Those were cool gam.
Ok so Gears.? Ah nah they sold it to big M. AH YES UNREAL FUCKIN TOURNAMENT!! Oh no it's been canceled for Fortnite. Like, ah I can't remember this small multiplayer game. Talk about being entitled with all this talk about "Exclusivity" and how horrible for PC is that people need to have two accounts.Īnd how about Epic competing with their OWN GAMES? On PC, all you have to do is download a different Storefront for free. So yes, I do prefer that Epic actually presents a competition to Steam, even if through buying exclusivity.Īnd god, console gamers had to BUY a hardware to play its exclusive content. But as a console gamer that always had to deal with exclusives games for one system or another, games thrived and revolutionized the industry in that environment. Now, is it good for PC in general? I don't know. And thus, its not a choice.Īnd how you combat that? With exclusive games. So when a platform has 70% of ALL PC DOWNLOAD/SALES inside of it, selling outside of it(As long as ypu are not Nintendo that can maintain itself with its own software alone) is not viable.
At least business-wise, if you don't want your company to go bankrupt. If it ian't viable, then there isn't really a choice. There is choice, and then there is viability. And anyone that knows a fraction of how the industry works would laugh you out of the room if that was the example you gave of "being enough to spur competition between platforms, and how devs can simply choose to sell directly to consumers if they so choose".Īnd you forget to mention that exclusivity is something that devs choose to partake.That is also part of competing. How well is GOG faring? And the Windows Store? What you proposed to do, as an example of "Steam is definely not a monopoly", is the same as proposing that a developer(EA, Capcom, Square, Ubisoft, etc) should create a new console if they are unhappy with how Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft handle their platforms. There is nothing stopping them from direct distribution except for one thing: Complete bankrupcy because of how improbable that task is lol
0 kommentar(er)
